绝对移动

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations only include idempotentHint. The description adds valuable behavioral context: coordinate axes conventions, value ranges for X/Y/Z/speed, default speed (100 mm/s), and that it returns confirmation of target coordinates and speed. However, it does not mention whether the move is synchronous or if there are safety prerequisites, leaving a minor gap.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is concise, front-loaded with the primary purpose, then delivers key details in a well-organized sequence (axes, ranges, speed, alternatives). Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With an output schema present, the description covers input constraints, default behavior, and alternative tools. It is sufficiently complete for safe and effective use of a motion control tool, given the provided annotations and schema.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema has 0% description coverage, but the description fully compensates by explaining axes directions and ranges for X, Y, Z, and speed, including the speed default. This provides essential meaning for all parameters beyond the schema's basic titles.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's function: '将机械臂末端移动到指定笛卡尔绝对坐标 (mm)' (move the robot arm end-effector to specified Cartesian absolute coordinates). This distinguishes it from siblings by explicitly naming move_relative and get_status as alternatives.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly provides when to use alternatives: '如果要基于当前位置偏移，用 move_relative。如果只是查询位置，用 get_status（只读）'. This gives clear guidance on tool selection.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.